The Classification Of Underdetermination Differentiating From The Perspective Of Marxism

The thesis of Under-determination is a problem that has been discussed a lot around the controversy of scientific realism and anti-realism. This thesis says that the evidence is insufficient to determine which theory in a group of competing theories is correct. It has been frequently used by post-positivists, as opposed to confirmation of evidence to theory. But, is it reasonable to use the thesis of under-determination as a basis arm against scientific realism ? To answer this question, we must first clarify the concept of under-determination. There are the different types of under-determination. How to understand them in Marxism? Are they incommensurable with the paradigm of Marxist Philosophy?As an important thesis in philosophy of science since the second half of the twentieth century,the thesis of Under-determination is inextricably linked with Marxist philosophy. What the thesis of Under-determination says is that scientific theory can't be fully determined by empirical evidence,while the overlap parts between it and Marxism are:first,the relationship between truth and facts,and the influence of social and historical conditions to truth;which is the most reasonable semantic theory of truth, the theory of correspondence,or the theory of consistence,or the pragmatistic theory?Is the doctrine in Marxist theory that the truth should be tested by practice be inconsistent with the dichotomy of observation and theory?Second,could scientific theory represent the world objectively? Maybe it is one of the overlap parts between Marxism and the thesis of Under-determination. There are four different epistemic types of under-determination. Which ones are reasonable in Marxism? Last, the thesis of under-determination can be understood differently by competitive theories referred in the thesis. Which ones are reasonable, and which ones are not?This paper is divided into five parts to answer these questions. In the introductive part, we try to give a brief history of the thesis of under-determination and fix the concepts in the thesis as the basis. The next three parts are the main contents in this paper. We try to analysis classifications the thesis of under-determination from different ways, which are the sematic way, the epistemic way and the dialectic way. We try to clarify meanings of these different types of under-determination and give some examples in the history of science. Then we will examine them in Marxism to judge how reasonable they are. Finally, on the base of analysis in the four chapters, we shall give a brief summary in the last chapter. What we learn from the thesis of under-determination is the uncertainty of science. But it doesn't mean that there is no truth and no reality in science. What we shall do is to figure out a better way to make a choice between rival theories, and give a better description about the relation between theories and evidences. What we do in this paper, which is to clarify different understanding of the thesis of under-determination, to analysis them in Marxism, is to promote the study of science in Marxism in the context of philosophy of science today.